I didn't see a thread on this, at least not with real data, so here it is:

Using QXC's build tester, I very carefully tested whether splitting actually makes a difference. I assumed it would make some small difference (as I think most people assume), but I was wrong. I tested 3 split methods. One method is to have no split, to simply send all 6 workers to mine one patch. One method is the half split, to send all 6 workers to one patch, then quickly select 3 and send them to a different patch. The final method tested is the one I use in real games, to quickly press f1 (select idle worker) and right click an individual mineral patch, to send each worker to its own patch. I also tested whether it matters if you build the first worker before or after sending the starting ones to gather.

I used Protoss in every trial, but the race should have no affect what so ever, because no supply buildings are produced.

The rally point was the same at all times for all trials. I made sure I restarted if I misclicked at all, so that each trial would be within an infinitesimally small margin of error. No chrono boost is used, because the way you split has no effect on your chrono boosts, and it would just add another margin of error.

The effectiveness of each split is measured by the number of minerals at the 1 minute and 2 minute marks.+ Show Spoiler +

If the tables look identical, they should, because they are. That is no exaggeration, it's real data I carefully recorded from in-game tests.

Yes, 1 and 2 minutes aren't very far into the game, so maybe the difference could pan out later, but really, considering how precisely equal each method is, I don't think the split would ever have any affect on any game. If you aren't seeing even a single extra 5 mineral return after 2 minutes into the game, I don't think you'll ever get an advantage large enough to account for even a single unit at any point through a game.

i) Speed was slowest throughout the whole 1min timer; the timer I used was real-time supplied by the build order tester map VERSION 2.3.

ii) This was timed to the second. By that I mean I stopped looking at the minerals once I saw 1:00 so if an scv was JUST about to put in minerals, he gets cut.

iii) Race used was terran.

iv) For F1 split, I started the split from 6th patch from the bottom. Then just clicked down each patch. 7th scv was placed on the nearest non-occupied patch.

Also, I have noticed a pattern with the F1 selection AI and it can probably be done even more efficiently than just clicking down a line; will investigate this later.

v) For half split, I split the scvs to the patches 2nd from the top and 2nd from the bottom. 7th scv was placed on the nearest non-occupied patch.

vi) For no split, I simply took all my scvs and right-clicked the fifth patch from the bottom, which is the closest and most centered patch on the beta tester map. 7th scv was placed on the nearest non-occupied patch.

These are my findings:

Minerals @ 1min

The difference between half and none is truly negligible.The difference between F1 and the rest is maybe a couple of milliseconds, just enough for one scv to finish his trip.

So there is a difference 40 seconds in, but this difference does not increase over time. So essentially, you get those 5 minerals with a perfect f1 split milliseconds sooner than without, but there is no exponential increase, so you won't see that difference in the 1 min or 2 min results.

Also, some people have mentioned (and I've stated myself) that the map matters. Some maps have obviously split mineral patches that will benefit from worker splits, especially if patches are optimized on the edges and not the middle where you would click for a no-split.

Btw, this thread has nothing to do with BW, or whether or not this is a good thing, it's just about data. I don't think that "requiring" splitting was at all a bad thing for BW, and I also don't think it's at all necessary for SC2, it's something you'll only do once a game, and it just is what it is.

Hmm perhaps its just a .5 second difference but I guess to some people it matters. For me I would still stick with the half split, although this is indeed very interesting and I thank you for your efforts.

if i que a scv, send all my scv's to one mineral (no micro) then the first scv will pop by the time i can que another, losing time. if i micro 2 of the scv's to go to seperate patches then i can que a 2nd scv just mila seconds before the first pops.

On June 03 2010 03:19 Tone_ wrote:If the split is fast enough (maybe the key component) it must make a different. Just logically?

Logically I would assume it would make some difference, especially with the F1 split, since, if you did it inhumanly quickly, you could instantly send all of them at the same time, so there is no wasted time what so ever.

However, it seems that, even when you save a few milliseconds in the very beginning of the game, it doesn't really pan out into anything significant down the road.

I actually got into the very precise split testing in the above method because I was already testing splits in how quickly I can get a 13 gate up. Every single time, no matter how I split, (and interestingly, even if I did an 8 pylon instead of 9 pylon), my gateway would throw down at 1min 14sec. I did use a precise methodology for that as well, with my rally and the exact timing I would move the probe to prepare to build pylon/gate. But yeah, point is, it's a bit surprising, but it seems the split has no affect on the game.

I was actually thinking about this a while ago, it seemed that trying to split them better sometimes made it worse (like miss-clicking and having them not mine for 1 second or so). It's sad though, I wish it would make a difference.

If a difference hasn't shown up after 1 min or 2 min it's probably not going to show up ever. If the numbers are identical at all data points, then they'll just be identical. I'm just surprised the numbers came out the same even though it's hard to get the same split each time.

If this is true though, then it's detrimental to do a split. There's the ever so small chance you mess up the split and miss clicking on the mineral line. The only purpose to do it would be to just get an early APM trial.

Thanks for this data! I've been using the half split, but have noticed that it's as fast as when I don't split. Plus the greater chance for miss clicks when splitting makes splitting not very good. So many times I thought I clicked the minerals but actually got the ground next to it.

This is probably because the workers are automatically split into their mineral field. Back in BW a worker would just move onto the next mineral, check if its in use, if it is then move again, else, mine.